Pennock's Fiero Forum
  Technical Discussion & Questions - Archive
  Put it on the scales today.

T H I S   I S   A N   A R C H I V E D   T O P I C
  

Email This Page to Someone! | Printable Version


Put it on the scales today. by scrabblegod
Started on: 12-19-2003 06:36 PM
Replies: 38
Last post by: Rocky64 on 12-24-2003 01:11 PM
scrabblegod
Member
Posts: 1009
From: Lexington, KY
Registered: Jun 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 58
Rate this member

Report this Post12-19-2003 06:36 PM Click Here to See the Profile for scrabblegodClick Here to Email scrabblegodSend a Private Message to scrabblegodDirect Link to This Post
I put my 87 notchie on the scales today.
4.9, 4T60E, spare and jack, 3/4 tank fuel, 98 Grand Am 16" rims with 205/50/R16.
It was 2780lbs. I wish I had gotten the weight before the swap to see the change.
With me in it, that makes 3000lbs siiting on the line.

Tomorrow morning, it goes on the dyno. Stock 4.9, I am guessing 180hp and 260ft torque at the wheels. We will see. I just want to know before I start upgrading the engine.

Gene

------------------

IP: Logged
PFF
System Bot
donk316
Member
Posts: 1952
From: Red Deer, Alberta, Canada
Registered: Mar 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 329
User Banned

Report this Post12-19-2003 08:50 PM Click Here to See the Profile for donk316Click Here to Email donk316Send a Private Message to donk316Direct Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by scrabblegod:

Tomorrow morning, it goes on the dyno. Stock 4.9, I am guessing 180hp and 260ft torque at the wheels. We will see. I just want to know before I start upgrading the engine.

I think its cool when ever someone does an engine swap and I can only imagine the amount of blood, sweat and tears it took to build it.

One thing though...
with those numbers wouldnt it have been easier to go 3.4 Pushrod or turbo 2.8? Orief's 3.4 is spanking those numbers and my 3.4 is built identical to his. So tell me what made you chose that engine?

Im being serious here and not intending to be an ass or troll or whatever. Thanks.

------------------

IP: Logged
Jncomutt
Member
Posts: 8876
From: Charlotte, NC
Registered: Apr 2001


Feedback score: (3)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 221
Rate this member

Report this Post12-19-2003 09:03 PM Click Here to See the Profile for JncomuttClick Here to Email JncomuttSend a Private Message to JncomuttDirect Link to This Post
Orief is also flywheel, hes going for wheel readings.

Also, you don't get that awesome V8 rumble..

IP: Logged
eunospeed
Member
Posts: 342
From: Lexington, KY
Registered: Sep 2002


Feedback score: (2)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post12-19-2003 09:22 PM Click Here to See the Profile for eunospeedClick Here to Email eunospeedSend a Private Message to eunospeedDirect Link to This Post
Gene,

Where are you having it dynoed? Would it be Horsepowerhouse?
can't wait to hear the results!!!

See you at our next meeting,
John

IP: Logged
rockcrawl
Member
Posts: 2528
From: Lehigh Valley, PA
Registered: Jul 2000


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 96
Rate this member

Report this Post12-19-2003 09:54 PM Click Here to See the Profile for rockcrawlClick Here to visit rockcrawl's HomePageClick Here to Email rockcrawlSend a Private Message to rockcrawlDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
I am guessing 180hp and 260ft torque at the wheels.

It won't be quite that high from a stock engine. You should be looking for more like 165 hp and 225 lb/ft. That equates to about 17% driveline loss.

IP: Logged
Archie
Member
Posts: 9399
From: Las Vegas, NV
Registered: Dec 1999


Feedback score:    (12)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 545
Rate this member

Report this Post12-19-2003 10:03 PM Click Here to See the Profile for ArchieClick Here to visit Archie's HomePageClick Here to Email ArchieSend a Private Message to ArchieDirect Link to This Post
You didn't weight it with Fish scales did you?
IP: Logged
scrabblegod
Member
Posts: 1009
From: Lexington, KY
Registered: Jun 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 58
Rate this member

Report this Post12-19-2003 11:42 PM Click Here to See the Profile for scrabblegodClick Here to Email scrabblegodSend a Private Message to scrabblegodDirect Link to This Post
I used the 4.9 because of the torque, and the general WOW factor. Whatever the numbers are, they are just the baseline for the stock engine. I have my second engine stripped down and am in the process of building it with a lot of custom engine work as there are no speed parts available.

I am also in the process of putting a 3.4DOHC in my other 87. It will be stock when I put it together, but I am considering turbocharging both engines. Prior to getting into the Fieros, I ran a Thunderbird TurboCoupe with dual front mount intercoolers and 24-26 psi boost. I am not afraid of assembling a turbo system for either car that will be reliable.
I will just have to put some thought into what system I will use to control the injection and ignition. I am leaning towards the megasquirt efi system and using a Saab stand alone, knock sensor driven boost control.

I have to say that working for a good size salvage yard certainly helps in gathering parts.

Gene

IP: Logged
scrabblegod
Member
Posts: 1009
From: Lexington, KY
Registered: Jun 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 58
Rate this member

Report this Post12-19-2003 11:46 PM Click Here to See the Profile for scrabblegodClick Here to Email scrabblegodSend a Private Message to scrabblegodDirect Link to This Post

scrabblegod

1009 posts
Member since Jun 2003
I am having it dynoed at SR Racing on Mercer Rd. They build Formula V cars.
They were a sponsor of the last AutoX event, and are offering discounted dyno time.

Two years ago, you had to go to many mile to get top a dyno. Now we have three chassis dynos in town with one of them being for AWD.

Gene

IP: Logged
scrabblegod
Member
Posts: 1009
From: Lexington, KY
Registered: Jun 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 58
Rate this member

Report this Post12-19-2003 11:49 PM Click Here to See the Profile for scrabblegodClick Here to Email scrabblegodSend a Private Message to scrabblegodDirect Link to This Post

scrabblegod

1009 posts
Member since Jun 2003
Rock,
That was just a guess that came from working the 1/4 mile times and mph. Could be way off but I wanted to stick my neck out and guess.

Gene

IP: Logged
I'm Back
Member
Posts: 3780
From: Phoenix, Az, USA
Registered: Oct 2002


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 260
Rate this member

Report this Post12-20-2003 10:11 AM Click Here to See the Profile for I'm BackClick Here to Email I'm BackSend a Private Message to I'm BackDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by donk316:

I think its cool when ever someone does an engine swap and I can only imagine the amount of blood, sweat and tears it took to build it.

One thing though...
with those numbers wouldnt it have been easier to go 3.4 Pushrod or turbo 2.8? Orief's 3.4 is spanking those numbers and my 3.4 is built identical to his. So tell me what made you chose that engine?

Im being serious here and not intending to be an ass or troll or whatever. Thanks.


3.4 pushrod? That isn't even close to a 4.9 in HP or torque. Turbo, well, you have inherent problems with those, especially heat concentration. I like the 4.9 with a carb for a cheap & easy swap. I think that and the 3.8 are right up there. I'm doing a N*, but considered everything from a 3.4 pusrod on up. I was seriously looking for a 3.8SC for a while, but couldn't find a good one - then the Caddy rollover came along. I think it would be cool if there is a 3.8 SC that has accomodations for a carb.

IP: Logged
DustoneGT
Member
Posts: 1274
From: The U.S. Superstate
Registered: Dec 2002


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 51
Rate this member

Report this Post12-20-2003 11:36 AM Click Here to See the Profile for DustoneGTSend a Private Message to DustoneGTDirect Link to This Post
Stock 2.8 86GT automatic
full size spare in trunk
two computers
all my tools in front
lots of other junk
and me--180-190lbs.

I put it on a scale at a dairy, weighed in at 2830 Lbs.
I want to go back one of these days and weigh it w/ no spare
or other junk, plus I could lose some weight myself...

IP: Logged
PFF
System Bot
chester
Member
Posts: 4063
From: State of insanity...moved in and comfortably numb...
Registered: Jun 2001


Feedback score:    (42)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 153
Rate this member

Report this Post12-20-2003 12:21 PM Click Here to See the Profile for chesterClick Here to Email chesterSend a Private Message to chesterDirect Link to This Post
Gene,

Sent you a couple of emails wth no reply? You have a pm.

Rob D.

------------------

The Dirty Rat
Chopped, dropped and just plain NASTY!
383 Stroker MPFI with N2O
2.5" Drop
11" Brakes
17" Revolutions
RCC Coilover Suspension
Updated June 29 '03 www.dirtyratracing.org

IP: Logged
Oreif
Member
Posts: 16460
From: Schaumburg, IL
Registered: Jan 2000


Feedback score:    (19)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 442
Rate this member

Report this Post12-20-2003 12:53 PM Click Here to See the Profile for OreifClick Here to visit Oreif's HomePageClick Here to Email OreifSend a Private Message to OreifDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by I'm Back:


3.4 pushrod? That isn't even close to a 4.9 in HP or torque.

Wanna bet?
If I remember correctly the stock 4.9L engines are 200hp/275 torque. (corrected, Thanks.)
My 3.4L is 223hp/239 torque verified on an engine dyno.

The other comment I have is I think he's going to be disappointed with his "at the wheels" numbers. The auto trans has more than 17% loss.
My auto trans had closer to 22% in stock form. It was dyno'd with 18% loss with heavy duty clutch's, a shift kit, and a street/strip converter.
Manual transmissions run 15-18% stock.

[This message has been edited by Oreif (edited 12-21-2003).]

IP: Logged
collinwestphal
Member
Posts: 698
From: Waukesha, WI, USA
Registered: Jun 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post12-20-2003 12:58 PM Click Here to See the Profile for collinwestphalSend a Private Message to collinwestphalDirect Link to This Post
stock 4.9L is 200 hp, 275 tq.
IP: Logged
2-tone
Member
Posts: 592
From: Winchester, KY
Registered: Jan 2002


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post12-20-2003 02:47 PM Click Here to See the Profile for 2-toneClick Here to Email 2-toneSend a Private Message to 2-toneDirect Link to This Post
Gene, Sorry i missed you guys the last meeting. Had to work .Got called in. That is the problim with working for a oil co.I drive a gas truck. So you work in a salvage yard. see if they have any HT 4100 RWD Caddys. I'm looking for a left manifold for my 4.9 swap. If you look these manifolds dump down . want to use 2 of them for my costom duel exhaust . Thanx. -B-
IP: Logged
Danno88GT5Spd
Member
Posts: 276
From:
Registered: Aug 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

User Banned

Report this Post12-20-2003 02:48 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Danno88GT5SpdSend a Private Message to Danno88GT5SpdDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Oreif:

Wanna bet?
If I remember correctly the stock 4.9L engines are 200hp/250 torque.
My 3.4L is 223hp/239 torque verified on an engine dyno.

The other comment I have is I think he's going to be disappointed with his "at the wheels" numbers. The auto trans has more than 17% loss.
My auto trans had closer to 22% in stock form. It was dyno'd with 18% loss with heavy duty clutch's, a shift kit, and a street/strip converter.
Manual transmissions run 15-18% stock.


Yea and is your 3.4 stock, no? How much have you wasted on the 3.4 mods? The 4.9 is stock and still compares closely with your modded 3.4. And I'll just bet there was more work put into your 3.4 than it would ever take to install a stock 4.9.

Don't get me wrong Oreif I like your car/motor it's pretty slick and very unique. Just trying to shed some light on peoples perspectives here.

[This message has been edited by Danno88GT5Spd (edited 12-20-2003).]

IP: Logged
Oreif
Member
Posts: 16460
From: Schaumburg, IL
Registered: Jan 2000


Feedback score:    (19)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 442
Rate this member

Report this Post12-20-2003 03:25 PM Click Here to See the Profile for OreifClick Here to visit Oreif's HomePageClick Here to Email OreifSend a Private Message to OreifDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Danno88GT5Spd:


Yea and is your 3.4 stock, no? How much have you wasted on the 3.4 mods? The 4.9 is stock and still compares closely with your modded 3.4. And I'll just bet there was more work put into your 3.4 than it would ever take to install a stock 4.9.

I was commenting on that a 3.4L pushrod could not get close without a turbo.
Actually, the amount of work to install my 3.4L was less than the 4.9L.
It dropped right in using stock mounts. I didn't do any more work than just replacing parts which anyone who rebuilds an engine would do. I don't think I "wasted" anything on my mods. I was just careful to make sure all the parts I used matched the others so everything works together. The engine is more reliable and easier to tune if it is built with matching parts. I spent less money building my 3.4L than it would cost to buy a 3.4L crate engine. I have no idea what it takes to put in a 4.9L or how much one costs, But I'd be willing to bet the cost of rebuilding a 4.9L and the cost of my 3.4L are either very close to the same or the 3.4L being less. Most likely less since there are some aftermarket parts availible for the 3.4L where I don't think you have much choice with a 4.9L.

IP: Logged
Danno88GT5Spd
Member
Posts: 276
From:
Registered: Aug 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

User Banned

Report this Post12-20-2003 04:02 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Danno88GT5SpdSend a Private Message to Danno88GT5SpdDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Oreif:

I was commenting on that a 3.4L pushrod could not get close without a turbo.
Actually, the amount of work to install my 3.4L was less than the 4.9L.
It dropped right in using stock mounts. I didn't do any more work than just replacing parts which anyone who rebuilds an engine would do. I don't think I "wasted" anything on my mods. I was just careful to make sure all the parts I used matched the others so everything works together. The engine is more reliable and easier to tune if it is built with matching parts. I spent less money building my 3.4L than it would cost to buy a 3.4L crate engine. I have no idea what it takes to put in a 4.9L or how much one costs, But I'd be willing to bet the cost of rebuilding a 4.9L and the cost of my 3.4L are either very close to the same or the 3.4L being less. Most likely less since there are some aftermarket parts availible for the 3.4L where I don't think you have much choice with a 4.9L.


You totally miss the point. You have modified motor statistics being compared to stock 4.9 motor statistics. Your motor was rebuilt? And was it to stock specs? To achieve your performance took a rebuild did it not? And bolt on performance parts?

If so, then it wasn't as easy as "just dropping in a 3.4L" it took a rebuild, and bolt on performance parts. I'll just bet you can't rebuild a 3.4L engine/ modify it bolt on performance parts and then install it in the same amount of time it takes to swap in a stock 4.9 motor. Not to mention modifying the decklid to fit the raised intake.

That was my point.

IP: Logged
befarrer
Member
Posts: 1962
From: Westlock, Alberta, CANADA
Registered: Aug 2002


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 61
Rate this member

Report this Post12-20-2003 08:21 PM Click Here to See the Profile for befarrerClick Here to Email befarrerSend a Private Message to befarrerDirect Link to This Post
Whatever,

Anyway, my car must be a light weight. it was 2700Lbs (or maybe 2770Lbs) with me (150lbs) and 3/4 of a tank of gas. Along with the spare, jack, some of my stuff, all interior, etc...

It is an 84 Sport Coupe 2.5 Auto, with almost nil options, only Map lights, rear window defrost, and well, that is it.

------------------
Details on my 1984 Fiero 2M4 Sport Coupe #1192 Here
Long live the Duke!! 2.5L Upgrade coming soon I hope.
1986 Fiero 2M4 Coupe, 2.5L 5-Speed
Member of the Edmonto Fiero Club

Rate me if you want!

IP: Logged
Will
Member
Posts: 13419
From: Where you least expect me
Registered: Jun 2000


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 234
Rate this member

Report this Post12-21-2003 09:20 AM Click Here to See the Profile for WillClick Here to Email WillSend a Private Message to WillDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Oreif:
Manual transmissions run 15-18% stock.

Depends. That's the traditional figure for longitudinal manual transmissions. I think the transverse manuals are 10% or less at 200+ power levels.

------------------
'87 Fiero GT: Northstar, Getrag, TGP wheels, rear sway bar, rod end links, bushings, etc.
'90 Pontiac 6000 SE AWD: Leaking ABS unit fixed, load levelling rear suspension fixed, still slow

IP: Logged
Oreif
Member
Posts: 16460
From: Schaumburg, IL
Registered: Jan 2000


Feedback score:    (19)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 442
Rate this member

Report this Post12-21-2003 11:59 AM Click Here to See the Profile for OreifClick Here to visit Oreif's HomePageClick Here to Email OreifSend a Private Message to OreifDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Danno88GT5Spd:


You totally miss the point. You have modified motor statistics being compared to stock 4.9 motor statistics. Your motor was rebuilt? And was it to stock specs? To achieve your performance took a rebuild did it not? And bolt on performance parts?

If so, then it wasn't as easy as "just dropping in a 3.4L" it took a rebuild, and bolt on performance parts. I'll just bet you can't rebuild a 3.4L engine/ modify it bolt on performance parts and then install it in the same amount of time it takes to swap in a stock 4.9 motor. Not to mention modifying the decklid to fit the raised intake.

That was my point.

Your missing the point.
MY 3.4L pushrod was mentioned (Not by me, See donk316's post)
The reply was it wasn't even close to the power of a 4.9L
I replied, wanna bet?
Then you replied about saying mine wasn't stock.
True it's not, but if you follow the chain of posts, I was responding to the other post which WAS referring to MY engine.

You can't hold the "rebuild" part as time against my swap. No matter what engine I dropped in, I would have rebuilt it and I would have used the least expensive aftermarket parts if they were available for the engine. I chose to do a rebuild because I wanted to know the internals were good. No offense but grabbing a motor that has more than 5K miles on it, and having no clue how the engine was driven or taken care of, Is something won't do. It's a personal preferece thing. The 3.4L block I used for a start only had 42K miles on it, But I still pulled it all apart and inspected/replaced everything. Not because I had to, but because I wanted to.

As for my decklid, it did not HAVE to be modified. I modified to fit my choice of air cleaner. The decklid scoop is also done by many with 4.9L.

[This message has been edited by Oreif (edited 12-21-2003).]

IP: Logged
PFF
System Bot
donk316
Member
Posts: 1952
From: Red Deer, Alberta, Canada
Registered: Mar 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 329
User Banned

Report this Post12-21-2003 01:11 PM Click Here to See the Profile for donk316Click Here to Email donk316Send a Private Message to donk316Direct Link to This Post
All I was wondering is what are the benefits of a 4.9 if the power numbers are that low? The through an automatic tranny? geez I would think it would feel like towing a boat.
IP: Logged
scrabblegod
Member
Posts: 1009
From: Lexington, KY
Registered: Jun 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 58
Rate this member

Report this Post12-21-2003 01:23 PM Click Here to See the Profile for scrabblegodClick Here to Email scrabblegodSend a Private Message to scrabblegodDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by donk316:

All I was wondering is what are the benefits of a 4.9 if the power numbers are that low? The through an automatic tranny? geez I would think it would feel like towing a boat.

The point is the torque and HP come in at such a low point, that it is strong.
The stock 4.9 does mid 14s right out of the box through the automatic. It would probably do close to taht towing a boat.

In the 1/8 mile, it is about untouchable by most things you will meet at a light. It is on the top end that it runs out of power and they reel you back in.

My new engine will address that issue.

You should find someone with a 4.9 and go for a ride some time.

Gene

IP: Logged
donk316
Member
Posts: 1952
From: Red Deer, Alberta, Canada
Registered: Mar 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 329
User Banned

Report this Post12-21-2003 01:27 PM Click Here to See the Profile for donk316Click Here to Email donk316Send a Private Message to donk316Direct Link to This Post
If the aftermarket opens up I might try it myself. Thanks for the info.
IP: Logged
Oreif
Member
Posts: 16460
From: Schaumburg, IL
Registered: Jan 2000


Feedback score:    (19)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 442
Rate this member

Report this Post12-21-2003 03:06 PM Click Here to See the Profile for OreifClick Here to visit Oreif's HomePageClick Here to Email OreifSend a Private Message to OreifDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by donk316:

All I was wondering is what are the benefits of a 4.9 if the power numbers are that low? The through an automatic tranny? geez I would think it would feel like towing a boat.

It's the high torque that gets the car going and gives the car the "push you in the seat" feel. With 275 ft/lbs of torque odds are you could pull a boat and not feel it.

IP: Logged
Howard_Sacks
Member
Posts: 1871
From: Cherry Hill, NJ
Registered: Apr 2001


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 294
User Banned

Report this Post12-21-2003 03:42 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Howard_SacksClick Here to visit Howard_Sacks's HomePageClick Here to Email Howard_SacksSend a Private Message to Howard_SacksDirect Link to This Post
Have you driven or gotten a ride in a car with a 4.9 yet?

On public roads, if you drive anywhere close to the speed limits, the car is traction limited.

It idles and cruises sooo much nicer then a 60 degree V6 too. and it sounds sweet.

 
quote
Originally posted by donk316:

All I was wondering is what are the benefits of a 4.9 if the power numbers are that low? The through an automatic tranny? geez I would think it would feel like towing a boat.

IP: Logged
PBJ
Member
Posts: 4167
From: London, On., Canada
Registered: Jan 2001


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 146
Rate this member

Report this Post12-21-2003 05:15 PM Click Here to See the Profile for PBJClick Here to Email PBJSend a Private Message to PBJDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by donk316:

All I was wondering is what are the benefits of a 4.9 if the power numbers are that low?

H/P and torque are definatly two different aspects of an engine. One of my favorite pics, there was video of the 5 runs with the fiero vs corvette. The turbo makes no difference in the 60 ft mark but is picking up through the 330 ft mark.

Thanks for posting the weights you found.

------------------

[This message has been edited by PBJ (edited 12-21-2003).]

IP: Logged
rockcrawl
Member
Posts: 2528
From: Lehigh Valley, PA
Registered: Jul 2000


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 96
Rate this member

Report this Post12-21-2003 07:39 PM Click Here to See the Profile for rockcrawlClick Here to visit rockcrawl's HomePageClick Here to Email rockcrawlSend a Private Message to rockcrawlDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
The auto trans has more than 17% loss.
My auto trans had closer to 22% in stock form.

With my stock 130k mile 4.9 and 4T60E I see 17.5% hp loss and 17.8% tq loss through the drivetrain. It runs a 13.9 1/4 mile fairly consistently.

[This message has been edited by rockcrawl (edited 12-21-2003).]

IP: Logged
blackrams
Member
Posts: 28764
From: Hattiesburg, MS, USA
Registered: Feb 2003


Feedback score:    (7)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 223
Rate this member

Report this Post12-21-2003 08:40 PM Click Here to See the Profile for blackramsClick Here to Email blackramsSend a Private Message to blackramsDirect Link to This Post
Gene,
So what did the 4.9 pull on the chart? Anxiously waiting to hear.

------------------
Ron
88 Formula, 4.9, auto, daily driver
88 Formula, 3800 SCII/4T65E Swap in Process, almost done.
88 Formula, 5 Spd, 3.4 TDC Swap in Process, just started.
88 Formula, Stock, 5 Spd, T Top, Special Days Only!

IP: Logged
Whuffo
Member
Posts: 3000
From: San Jose, CA
Registered: Jul 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 154
Rate this member

Report this Post12-22-2003 12:04 AM Click Here to See the Profile for WhuffoClick Here to visit Whuffo's HomePageClick Here to Email WhuffoSend a Private Message to WhuffoDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Howard_Sacks:

Have you driven or gotten a ride in a car with a 4.9 yet?

On public roads, if you drive anywhere close to the speed limits, the car is traction limited.

It idles and cruises sooo much nicer then a 60 degree V6 too. and it sounds sweet.

Not only that, you can run it pure stock and have more power than a street-driven Fiero can use. Good gas mileage and smooth performance from a motor that'll go 200K without problems.

All this and it's a fairly inexpensive swap. The 3.4 DOHC is a screamer, but it develops its power at higher RPMS. The 4.9 pulls hard from idle and it has that V8 sound...

IP: Logged
Mastermind
Member
Posts: 1396
From: Chicago, 4.9 IL
Registered: Apr 2002


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 207
User Banned

Report this Post12-22-2003 12:25 AM Click Here to See the Profile for MastermindSend a Private Message to MastermindDirect Link to This Post
m
 
quote
Originally posted by Howard_Sacks:

Have you driven or gotten a ride in a car with a 4.9 yet?

On public roads, if you drive anywhere close to the speed limits, the car is traction limited.

It idles and cruises sooo much nicer then a 60 degree V6 too. and it sounds sweet.

Howard, I'm curious about what you meant by "Traction Limited"?

I'd like to know so that I can start focusing on it while driving my 4.9

IP: Logged
PFF
System Bot
Howard_Sacks
Member
Posts: 1871
From: Cherry Hill, NJ
Registered: Apr 2001


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 294
User Banned

Report this Post12-22-2003 10:20 AM Click Here to See the Profile for Howard_SacksClick Here to visit Howard_Sacks's HomePageClick Here to Email Howard_SacksSend a Private Message to Howard_SacksDirect Link to This Post
I mean at low speeds(under 50 or so), it can be tough to get all the power to the ground. Simply, it is just wheelspin.

 
quote
Originally posted by Mastermind:

mHoward, I'm curious about what you meant by "Traction Limited"?

I'd like to know so that I can start focusing on it while driving my 4.9

IP: Logged
Fieroking
Member
Posts: 2126
From: Coeur d'Alene, Idaho
Registered: Jun 2002


Feedback score:    (11)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 78
Rate this member

Report this Post12-22-2003 03:12 PM Click Here to See the Profile for FierokingClick Here to visit Fieroking's HomePageClick Here to Email FierokingSend a Private Message to FierokingDirect Link to This Post
We put our 4.9 with a manual tranny on the dyno last month. We came up with the following numbers HP 182.4 Torq 255 Ft/lbs. I will try to post scans of the printouts. I'll be interested to see how your auto compares

Joe Sokol
88 Formula/GT 4.9 5 speed
85 Se V6 5 Speed

IP: Logged
fieroturbo
Member
Posts: 1085
From: Orefield, PA
Registered: Jan 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post12-22-2003 05:14 PM Click Here to See the Profile for fieroturboClick Here to Email fieroturboSend a Private Message to fieroturboDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by befarrer:

Whatever,

Anyway, my car must be a light weight. it was 2700Lbs (or maybe 2770Lbs) with me (150lbs) and 3/4 of a tank of gas. Along with the spare, jack, some of my stuff, all interior, etc...

It is an 84 Sport Coupe 2.5 Auto, with almost nil options, only Map lights, rear window defrost, and well, that is it.


84's were actually the lightest of all Fiero's, and just got heavier year by year.

Geez, you figure, without driver, the duke fieros weigh 2450-2550 lbs. And the duke motor's are all iron.

Imagine how light my Fiero will be when I finish the all aluminum Ecotec Turbo conversion I'm doing. I'm estimating well under 2500lbs.

The block weighs a mere 69lbs...I could bench more than that when I was 12 years old.

And are you guys sure that the 4.9 Caddy is 200HP? I coulda sworn that they were 300HP. That's what the Eldorado's stock HP is, and it has a 4.9. Me confused.

IP: Logged
MinnGreenGT
Member
Posts: 11518
From: Lakeville, MN 55044
Registered: Jul 2001


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 275
Rate this member

Report this Post12-22-2003 06:23 PM Click Here to See the Profile for MinnGreenGTClick Here to visit MinnGreenGT's HomePageClick Here to Email MinnGreenGTSend a Private Message to MinnGreenGTDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by fieroturbo:

And are you guys sure that the 4.9 Caddy is 200HP? I coulda sworn that they were 300HP. That's what the Eldorado's stock HP is, and it has a 4.9. Me confused.

You may be thinking of newer 4.6L N* Edlorados... which ran closer to 300hp.

The 4.9 was listed at 200hp/275TQ... there are a number of places that list those type of specs: http://www.100megsfree4.com/cadillac/cad1990/cad91d.htm This whole site is full of good caddy info dating from 1902 to current: http://www.100megsfree4.com/cadillac/

IP: Logged
Mastermind
Member
Posts: 1396
From: Chicago, 4.9 IL
Registered: Apr 2002


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 207
User Banned

Report this Post12-24-2003 04:00 AM Click Here to See the Profile for MastermindSend a Private Message to MastermindDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Howard_Sacks:

I mean at low speeds(under 50 or so), it can be tough to get all the power to the ground. Simply, it is just wheelspin.

Howard, I never experienced wheelspin. Unless, it's wet outside or I'm driving hard over loose road surfaces like, gravel, sand etc. Anybody else have problem with wheelspin?

IP: Logged
Mr. Pat
Member
Posts: 1860
From: Melbourne, VIC Australia
Registered: Apr 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 76
Rate this member

Report this Post12-24-2003 08:45 AM Click Here to See the Profile for Mr. PatClick Here to visit Mr. Pat's HomePageClick Here to Email Mr. PatSend a Private Message to Mr. PatDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Mastermind:

Howard, I never experienced wheelspin. Unless, it's wet outside or I'm driving hard over loose road surfaces like, gravel, sand etc. Anybody else have problem with wheelspin?


Im sure off the line several people do. But from a role is really hard for a Fiero, no matter whats packing.

IP: Logged
Howard_Sacks
Member
Posts: 1871
From: Cherry Hill, NJ
Registered: Apr 2001


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 294
User Banned

Report this Post12-24-2003 12:09 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Howard_SacksClick Here to visit Howard_Sacks's HomePageClick Here to Email Howard_SacksSend a Private Message to Howard_SacksDirect Link to This Post
What gearing are you running? and tires and shocks too..

You have any timeslips? Not because I dont believe you, but Im just curious to see what your numbers look like.


 
quote
Originally posted by Mastermind:

Howard, I never experienced wheelspin. Unless, it's wet outside or I'm driving hard over loose road surfaces like, gravel, sand etc. Anybody else have problem with wheelspin?

IP: Logged
Rocky64
Member
Posts: 132
From: Coleman, MI USA
Registered: Jul 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post12-24-2003 01:11 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Rocky64Click Here to Email Rocky64Send a Private Message to Rocky64Direct Link to This Post
"Out of the box" torque? The 3800 SC II runs 240 hp and 280 ft lbs of torque from the factory. With headers and a cold air intake (which are mods that a lot of people do anyway) and a 3.4 pulley change, you are then at about 270 hp and over 300 ft lbs of torque. Over the last month or so I've done a lot of research on the 3800 SC II and have found that the torque is so awesome that it seems that people complain that it breaks axles more often than the N* or the SBC's... At least that's what I've read on this forum and elsewhere on the net. V8 archie seems to think the SBC is okay in regards to axles... I suppose if you keep the 3800 at around 300 hp that you should be okay with axles but a lot of guys are running even smaller pulleys and breaking axles with the 3800 SC. (BTW, ever see FieroX and his 11.55 sec 1/4 video clip? http://www.fierox.com/updates.htm ). Anyway--sort of off on a tangent here but I considered the 3.4 pushrod--almost bought one from a guy who was swapping OUT his modded 3.4 pushrod to put in a 3800 SC II--so that's how I got thinking about the 3800. I also considered the DOHC 3.4 and the two caddy V8s, esp the 4.9 and spoke with one guy on the phone about it---the guy from down south that does them--I think he's a member of this site. I also came really close to buying a SBC TPI system. I finally went with the 3800 SC because it's pretty impressive stock, and gets decent gas milage, better than a SBC, and has lots of low end torque. You can get an additional 30-40 hp out of it with minimal mods. For me, it was the way to go. Forged pistons, steel crank, cross bolted mains, factory super charger... what a great engine!
IP: Logged



All times are ET (US)

T H I S   I S   A N   A R C H I V E D   T O P I C
  

Contact Us | Back To Main Page

Advertizing on PFF | Fiero Parts Vendors
PFF Merchandise | Fiero Gallery | Ogre's Cave
Real-Time Chat | Fiero Related Auctions on eBay



Copyright (c) 1999, C. Pennock